Violation of transparency law, furnishing convoluted response
*Expresses concern over delay of 2 yrs in furnishing info
Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Apr 4: Taking serious note of violation of Right to Information Act and furnishing of convoluted response, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has sought explanation from Tehsildar Bahu and Assistant Settlement Officer in the office of Commissioner, Survey and Land Records. Moreover, serious concern has been expressed over non-adherence to the timelines for furnishing of information fixed under the transparency law.
An applicant had filed an RTI application on July 4, 2020 before the Tehsildar Bahu seeking information on seven points—whether the settlement work of the village Chhani Beeja has been completed and if not the reasons for the same; whether the land bearing Khasra No.54, Khata No.1, Khewat No.1 located in this village is ‘Gair Mumkin Talab’ and how much area out of ‘Gair Mumkin Talab’ has been covered under construction till date etc.
Astonishingly, no reply was furnished by the Tehsildar Bahu within the timeframe mentioned in the RTI Act and this compelled the applicant to knock the doors of the First Appellate Authority, which too remained un-adjudicated. Aggrieved over non-receipt of the information, the applicant approached the Central Information Commission with the Second Appeal.
During the course of hearing of Second Appeal, the Tehsildar Bahu made a written submission whereby information with respect to two queries was furnished and response on other points was denied on the ground of non-availability of record/information.
Upon perusal of records of the case and hearing averments of the appellant, the Chief Information Commissioner Y K Sinha observed, “PIO/Tehsildar (Bahu) Dr Rohit Sharma has not explained the cause of delay of two years in furnishing the reply, even though this is a violation of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005”.
“Moreover, the RTI application should have been transferred to the actual custodian of information under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, at least when the reply dated 25.03.2022 was sent since the PIO, Tehsildar (Bahu) claimed that information with respect to five queries was not available in his office”, the Commission said, adding “moreover, the responses provided on two points also do not appear convincing and satisfactory and are rather convoluted”.
Furthermore, the PIO neither attended the hearing himself nor deputed any other official to attend the hearing on his behalf, the Commission said, adding “even on a previous occasion while deciding case No. CIC/UTOJK/A/2020/118896/C, filed by an appellant Raj Kumar, the same respondent- Dr Rohit Sharma had neither attended the hearing held through audio conference nor furnished any plausible explanation for the delay in furnishing of a response”.
“The delayed and deficient reply dated 25.03.2022, non transfer of the RTI application to the actual custodian of information and repeated absence of the PIO during the hearings of this Commission led to vitiating the proceedings”, the Commission said.
Accordingly, the Commission has directed the Tehsildar Bahu to furnish an accurate and specific reply on two points within three weeks of receipt of this order and transfer the RTI application to the relevant custodian of information ensuring that the appellant is provided complete and correct information on remaining points.
Moreover, the Commission has issued show cause notice to the Dr Rohit Sharma asking him to explain his failure in adhering to provisions stipulated under the Act and why no penal action under Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 should be initiated against him for causing obstruction and delay in furnishing information with respect to the RTI queries in gross violation of the provisions of the RTI Act as also repeatedly absenting himself from hearings or deputing a responsible person on his behalf, thereby vitiating the hearings.
The same applicant had also approached the Public Information Officer in the office of Survey and Land Records on July 4, 2020 seeking information vis-à-vis whether the erstwhile Jammu tehsil was notified for undertaking the settlement work of revenue records on December 21, 1990 and what is the targeted date of completion of the same etc.
As neither PIO nor First Appellate Authority provided information to the applicant the latter approached the Central Information Commission, which has observed, “respondent has furnished a reply dated 29.03.2022 in response to the RTI application dated 04.07.2020 without any plausible explanation for the delay in furnishing the information”, adding “moreover, the PIO has placed reliance on replies of 2019, which did not provide a satisfactory response to the appellant”.
Accordingly, the Commission has directed the PIO/Assistant Settlement Officer in the office of Commissioner, Survey and Land Records Khalid Hussain to submit an appropriate reply with respect to the four RTI queries mentioned in the RTI application dated 04.07.2020 and an appropriate explanation for the delay caused in furnishing the reply, in contravention of the timeline laid down under the RTI Act 2005.
“These specific directions shall be duly complied with by the PIO/Assistant Settlement Officer within four weeks of receipt of this order and a compliance report in this regard must reach the Commission by 10.05.2022 failing which appropriate action shall be initiated as per law, on the basis of available records”, the Chief Information Commissioner said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
